DOCTORAL DISSERTATION RESEARCH: Sophisticated Rejection of Scientific Evidence

科学发现和创新在无数方面塑造了美国人的生活，但并不是所有的科学进步都受到公众的热烈欢迎。这个项目调查了预测公众接受或拒绝科学证据的因素，重点是老练的拒绝论者。有能力对科学证据进行批判性评估，但仍拒绝在关键问题上达成科学共识的个人。拟议的研究结果将确定可能出现复杂的拒绝科学的情况，了解人们如何坚持与科学共识背道而驰的信念(例如，儿童接种疫苗)，并提出关于科学的沟通方法，以使其得到公平的倾听。科学家采取严格的预防措施，以确保他们的研究的有效性和报告的准确性。然而，公众可能会基于科学家使用的因素以外的因素来拒绝在一个问题上的科学共识(例如，转基因食品)。这项研究计划调查了导致这种拒绝的一个可能的因素：个人可能缺乏理解和评估科学证据所需的技能。在早期的工作中，研究人员开发并验证了一种新的测量非科学家？科学推理技能(SRS)，定义为评估科学结果的有效性所需的技能。本研究使用这一量表来理解研究中迄今发现的一群人：？老练的拒绝论者？被定义为拥有高SRS分数但仍拒绝在关键问题上达成科学共识的个人。第一项研究将分析来自国家科学与工程统计中心的数据？公众对科学技术的态度和理解的调查，寻找这种老练的拒绝论者的证据。第二项研究将调查他们是如何拒绝科学的。他们是否未能运用他们的技能来剖析虚假的科学论点，或者他们对科学证据的解释是否因为他们相信大多数科学家认为是错误的或不完整的主张而产生偏见？另外两项研究将测试通过改变科学的传播方式来减少对科学的复杂排斥的策略。总体而言，这项研究加深了对非科学家如何评估、有时甚至拒绝科学证据的科学理解。

Scientific findings and innovations have shaped American life in countless ways, but not all scientific advances have received a warm reception by the public. This project investigates the factors that predict public acceptance or rejection of scientific evidence, focusing on ?sophisticated rejectionists,? individuals who possess the ability to evaluate scientific evidence critically, but still reject the scientific consensus on key issues. The results of the proposed research will identify situations where sophisticated rejection of science is likely, understand how people maintain beliefs contrary to the scientific consensus (e.g., childhood vaccinations) and suggest ways to communicate about science so that it receives a fair hearing.Scientists take rigorous precautions to ensure the validity of their research and the accuracy of its reporting. However, the public may reject the scientific consensus on an issue (e.g., genetically modified foods) based on factors other than those employed by scientists. This research program examines one possible contributor to such rejection: individuals may lack the skills needed to understand and evaluate scientific evidence. In earlier work, the researcher developed and validated a novel scale measuring nonscientists? scientific reasoning skills (SRS), defined as those needed to assess the validity of scientific results. The present research uses this scale to understand a group of individuals identified in the research to date: ?sophisticated rejectionists,? defined as individuals who have high SRS scores yet still reject the scientific consensus on key issues. The first study will analyze data from the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics? Survey of Public Attitudes Toward and Understanding of Science and Technology, looking for evidence of such sophisticated rejectionists. The second study will investigate how they reject science. Do they fail to apply their skills to dissect spurious scientific arguments or is their interpretation of scientific evidence biased by their belief in claims that most scientists would consider false or incomplete? Two additional studies will test strategies to reduce sophisticated rejection of science by varying how science is communicated. As a whole, this research furthers scientific understanding of how nonscientists evaluate, and sometimes reject, scientific evidence.